No. 25-1329October Term 2025Before Arguments
Wealthy, Inc., et al., Petitioners v. Spencer Cornelia, et al.
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Case status
- Current stage
- Before Arguments
- Latest event
- Accepted by the Court
- Decision timing
- No window until argument is scheduled.
- What it's about
from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Question presented
1. Whether such an anti-SLAPP statute is displaced by Rules 12(b)(6) and 56, applies as enacted, or applies only in the hybrid form described above. 2. Whether the Ninth Circuit erred by designating Petitioners as limited-purpose public figures without finding a pre-existing public controversy, voluntary injection into it, and germaneness, as required by Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc., 418 U.S. 323 (1974), Wolston v. Reader’s Digest Ass’n, 443 U.S. 157 (1979), and Hutchinson v. Proxmire, 443 U.S. 111 (1979).
- Case path
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit / Accepted by the Court
- Area
Supreme Court case awaiting argument
Timing
Expected by late June 2026, if argued this term
The Court granted review but has not yet scheduled oral argument. Once argued, the median case reaches a decision in 94 days. Nearly all cases are decided by the end of the term in which they are argued.
Briefing
What it's about
Wealthy, Inc. v. Spencer Cornelia asks whether a state anti-SLAPP statute can be used in federal court, and if so, whether it is displaced by federal rules, applies as written, or works only in a hybrid form. It also asks whether the Ninth Circuit wrongly treated the petitioners as public figures for a specific controversy.
Argument
The Court has not scheduled oral argument. The petition asks the justices to resolve the split over anti-SLAPP laws in federal court and review the Ninth Circuit's public-figure analysis.
Impact
The answer could change whether a defendant sued in federal court can use a special early-dismissal process and seek fees under a state anti-SLAPP law. It also matters for plaintiffs, because being treated as a public figure for one controversy can make some claims harder to prove.
What is Wealthy, Inc. v. Spencer Cornelia about?
The petition asks whether a state anti-SLAPP law can be used in federal court and in what form. It also challenges the Ninth Circuit's decision to treat the petitioners as public figures for one controversy.
Who could be affected by Wealthy, Inc. v. Spencer Cornelia?
Parties in federal cases involving anti-SLAPP laws could be affected, especially when a defendant seeks early dismissal or fee shifting. Plaintiffs could also face tougher standards if courts label them public figures for a specific dispute.
What happens next in Wealthy, Inc. v. Spencer Cornelia?
The Court must decide whether to grant review. If it does, the next major step would be oral argument, but none is scheduled yet.
Related cases
Grounding
- Grounding
- Primary materials plus reporting.
- Note
- Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.
- Checked
- Jul 17, 2026
- Method
- Methodology